2 thoughts on “China Stops Building Wind Turbines Because Most Of The Energy Is Wasted”

  1. “This is why the “renewables” are such an unserious, crappy power source.”

    No, this is why SOME renewables are mediocre power sources. Even wind, the most volatile of renewable power sources, CAN be over the short term (weeks) a stone cold steady power source. If one is willing to invest sufficiently in energy banking. The cheapest over the long term form of energy banking is hydraulic, i.e., pump water uphill with excess wind power, flow it back down as a steady source. The same, or similar, can be done with solar. Then there’s the nascent ability to crack water. These are, of course, quite inefficient from a technical standpoint, BUT, when it’s either inefficient or lose/waste the power while destabilizing the grid, inefficient seems like a winner.

    Some other renewables can generate nice steady power without big additional investments. Hydropower, tidal power, and wave power all can do the trick, sort of. Geothermal is the steadiest of renewables. Well, it’s the steadiest of terrestrial renewables. Space Based Solar Power holds a lot of promise from the perspective of steady reliable power. Not that it’s cheap yet….

  2. The idiot warmists do not understand that power grids only work when the power being input EXACTLY equals the power being taken out. Since you can roughly predict but not precisely control the power being taken out (absent forced blackouts), you have to be able to ADJUST the power coming in. This is why the “renewables” are such an unserious, crappy power source. No way to adjust output up and down as humans power needs change. Instead, they do the exact opposite, raising and lowering their output as clouds obscure solar panels and winds randomly subside or increase. The only way to use this crappy “renewable” power is to have a whole lot of nuclear or fossil-fuel energy sources ready to jump in or stand down to bail out the silly renewables.

    Hence, accept NUCLEAR POWER as your alternate to CO2 output or just live with whatever fossil-fuel consumption is going to do to the planet, which I think is very little.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.